Lord Rooker: The Government support offsetting as part of a hierarchy of actions, the most important being to reduce emissions. We acknowledge that carbon offsetting is not a cure for climate change, but it can help to raise awareness and to reduce the impact of our actions.
	The Government support the use of offsets generated by robust and verifiable mechanisms bound by international regulation. The Government's own offsetting schemes use the clean development mechanism (CDM), which can also be accessed by consumers through a variety of providers. We have also proposed that the CDM and other regulatory market offset mechanisms form the core of Defra's voluntary code of best practice for the provision of offsetting to UK customers.
	The CDM is supervised by an executive board, established by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This is responsible for full oversight and the release of certified emission reductions (CERs) to projectsthat have met the requirements of the CDM process. That process is multi-stage, employing stringent verification procedures to ensure the real value of the emission reductions generated.
	The carbon market is an essential part of the package to tackle climate change globally and is a crucial mechanism to help to drive the investment needed to reduce emissions cost-effectively. The market is growing rapidly and faces development issues, as any emerging market does. For example, there is a need for more investment, via the carbon market, in Africa. At the second meeting of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (COP/MOP2) in Nairobi, there was a particular focus on enabling wider uptake of CDM projects—a "Nairobi framework" was agreed to facilitate investment in Africa. The UK, as the major focus of the carbon market, wants to work to connect market experts here with project developers in Africa as a contribution to this work.
	COP/MOP2 also encouraged further initiatives to help to build capacity to carry out projects and agreed measures aimed, for instance, to aid easier development of small-scale CDM projects. We are also co-operating with colleagues in other countries to consider how we might link the EU-ETS, which is currently at the heart of the carbon market, to other emerging schemes and so work towards a truly global market for carbon.
	There is currently no regulation of businesses that sell carbon offsetting mechanisms. However, on 18 January, Defra launched a consultation on a voluntary code of best practice for the provision of carbon offsetting to customers. The consultation closed on 13 April 2007 and the code of best practice is expected to be operational by the end of the year.
	The purpose of establishing a code is to ensure consumer confidence in an emerging market and continued growth of that market through that confidence. The code will be voluntary and offset providers can choose whether to seek accreditation for all, or some, of their offsetting products.
	The code proposes that offset providers supply consumers with clear information and transparent prices. It is not for the Government to dictate prices for CO2 offsets, but there is a market price for carbon, established by the EU-ETS, which is available to the public as a point of reference.
	Defra plans to support the standard by providing guidance to consumers on offsetting, which will also help consumers to make informed decisions about their actions.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have reviewed the extent to which the Data Protection Act 1998 or the Freedom of Information Act 2000 need to be amended in the public interest so as further to limit or restrictthe right of public access (a) to information about the activities of Members of Parliament, or (b) to information communicated to public authorities by Members of Parliament in their capacity as such; and, if so, for what reasons and in what respects are such amendments needed.

Earl Howe: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether fur farmers whose businesses were terminated on the bringing into force of the Fur Farming (Prohibition) Act 2000 have received financial compensation arising from that Act; and, if so, what was the range of amounts paid tothem.

Lord Naseby: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What percentage of total National Health Service expenditure was spent on medicines in the latest year for which data are available; andwhat was the equivalent percentage 10 years previously.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The following table shows total net drugs expenditure and National Health Service revenue expenditure for the years 1995-96 and 2005-06.
	
		
			  Total net drugs expenditure (£ million) Total net NHS revenue expenditure (£ million) Drugs spend as proportion of total NHS revenue expenditure (%) 
			 1995-96 4,379 30,250 14.5 
			 2005-06 9,979 73,677 13.5 
		
	
	National Health Service expenditure is the total NHS net revenue expenditure. NHS expenditure is a on a cash basis pre-1999-2000 inclusive, and a resource basis post-1999-2000. Resource budgeting (RB) was introduced in two stages. Phase 1 (2000-01 to 2002-03) included debtors and creditors and phase 2 (2003-04 onwards) applies full RB.
	As a result of these accounting differences, the two years are not strictly comparable.
	Notes: Figures are net which include Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme receipt savings.
	Source: Prescription pricing division of the NHS Business Services Authority, England and department finance division.

Lord Rooker: The England catchment sensitive farming capital grant scheme is available in 40 catchments. These catchments were identified jointly by the Environment Agency and English Nature (now part of Natural England) from data gathered for water framework directive purposes on nitrates, phosphorus and sediment pollution, combined with data on sensitive freshwater fisheries, chalk streams, failing bathing waters, groundwaters and lakes designated as special areas of conservation. English Nature prioritisation of designated sites at risk of diffuse water pollution from agriculture was also taken into account. Further local appraisals were carried out to target specific areas and pollutants as set out in a funding priority statement for each catchment. These statements can be found at www.defra.gov.uk/farm/environment/water/csf/grants/capital-grants-scheme.htm. I have also arranged for the information requested to be placed in the Library of the House.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The findings of the Musicians Union's "State of the Nation" survey are yet to be published. In assessing the impact of the Licensing Act on live music, we will look at a range of evidence, and the views of the Musicians Union's members will provide a valuable contribution.
	DCMS set up the Live Music Forum to help to monitor the impact of the Licensing Act on live music. It has been working with, and drawing on, evidence from a range of stakeholders, including the Musicians Union. In addition, DCMS has commissioned its own research to assess the Act's impact in this area, details of which are available on the DCMS website: www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_library/Research. This research is also available in the Library of the House.

Lord Jones of Cheltenham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the proposal by the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games to build shooting ranges at the Royal Artillery Barracks at Woolwich at an estimated cost of £18 million, with a further cost of £8 million to demolish the construction after the games, satisfies value for money and lasting legacy criteria.

Lord Rooker: The Government have voluntary agreements withthe newspaper, periodical publishing and direct marketing industries, which are intended to lessen their contribution to carbon emissions and waste. The agreements are designed to improve recycling rates and recycled content of such media and to allow more effective "opt-out" services for the public.
	The Government and the Newspaper Publishers Association (NPA) reached a voluntary agreement in April 2000 to increase the recycled content of newsprint, signing up to targets to reach 60 per cent by the end of 2001, 65 per cent by the end of 2003 and 70 per cent by the end of 2006.
	The industry has exceeded these targets year on year, achieving 63.5 per cent by the end of 2001,68.6 per cent by the end of 2003 and an industry estimated rate of 80.6 per cent in 2006.
	The Government also signed a voluntary agreement with the Periodical Publishers Association (PPA) in November 2005, to increase the rate of magazine recycling through a number of initiatives. The PPA, which represents around 90 per cent of publishers in the UK, agreed to raise recycling levels to 50 per cent by 2007, 60 per cent by 2010 and 70 per cent by 2013.
	As part of the agreement, the PPA will work with local authorities with the aim of increasing the rate of magazine recycling and providing advertising and editorial space for promoting magazine recycling initiatives. It will also use the Waste and Resources Action Programme's (WRAP) recycling logo in a prominent place in its magazines (the target coverage for this logo is 95 per cent of PPA membership by the end of 2006) and will work with WRAP on a study into barriers to using recycled content in magazines.
	The recycling rate of magazines was estimated to be 40 per cent (270,000 tonnes) in 2003. A recent report by the PPA estimated the recycling rate to be 45 per cent in 2005, which equates to around 302,000 tonnes.
	To reduce the volume of direct mail, the Government signed a voluntary agreement with the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) in July 2003, which set recycling targets to increase the recycling of direct mail to 70 per cent by 2013. The agreement also encourages producers of direct mail to avoid using materials that contaminate the recycling process. In addition, the agreement aims to improve the targeting of direct mail, thereby reducing the volume of mail distributed in the first place by encouraging the use of suppression files. These files list people who have opted out of receiving direct mail.